Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!mcdurb!aglew
From: aglew@mcdurb.Urbana.Gould.COM
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Criteria ... [really: are N designs
Message-ID: <28200322@mcdurb>
Date: 1 Jun 89 01:57:00 GMT
References: <231@ross.UUCP>
Lines: 27
Nf-ID: #R:ross.UUCP:231:mcdurb:28200322:000:1356
Nf-From: mcdurb.Urbana.Gould.COM!aglew    May 31 20:57:00 1989


>/* May 23, 1989 by bcase@cup.portal.com in mcdurb:comp.arch */
>Well, the jury has given its verdict:  I was wrong in complaining about
>John Mashey's long, marketing-oriented posting.  Since this court's
>decision applies to all citizens, I now have the same freedom to post
>stupid stuff (i.e., the same stuff I have always been posting!).

I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but...

Brian, please don't start getting involved in counter-measures.

Mash, I know it's not up for votes, but some of your posts recently have
been long on marketing and short on the detailed technical data that we
have grown to value your posts for.
    Actually, I would describe them as "pseudo-technical" discussions.
I had a technically oriented boss who would drown out argument by using
the same technique, of piling on the detail, of talking about all the 
tradeoffs, until you didn't notice the slant he was taking.

Nonetheless, Mash's posts are still interesting, even though tiresome,
and I am enjoying the back-and-forth of theories of marketing. It's just
getting close to my limit.

How about the participants in the marketing wars taking a deep breath,
trying to do only short posts for a while -- and then starting up on their
diatribes next month with a fresh and interesting set of arguments,
instead of going over all the old ones again and again?